Yes, the government are cunts. Again

It\’s disturbing to be on the same side of anything as Liberal Conspiracy.

However. The government has, in a moment of crass imbecility, decided that Afghan translators to the UK military will not be allowed to move to the UK when the troops withdraw.

This is cunti di tutti cunti style behaviour.

Quite apart from anything else next time we want to go to war somewhere we\’re going to find it hard to recruit people if the last lot we recruited were strung up with piano wire 30 seconds after we left.

Sign here please.

Given this sort of behaviour by D. Cameron people are still wondering why UKIP wins votes. Sheesh.

50 thoughts on “Yes, the government are cunts. Again”

  1. Turning this into a Kipper point is a bit much, given their “fuck off we’re full” take on matters. But agree.

    As far as I can make out the Home Office and UKBA are so mired in the “MUST KEEP OUT EVERYONE WE POSSIBLY CAN” mindset that nobody notices and nobody warns the minister in charge that this is a strategically and PR-ishly terrible move.

    Exactly the same drill with Iraqis and Gurkhas under the last shower.

    Tim adds: Kippers on immigration? I guarantee that it would take two minutes to wind up a roomful of Kippers to be ready to march out and hang Cameron over this. We gave the Gurkha campaign a hell of a lot of support: I was working in the London office at that time. I know damn well we did.

    Desiring “some rules” over immigration doesn’t mean no immigration. And it certainly doesn’t mean not wanting those who have fought with and for us to immigrate.

  2. We have an open door for any shit who wants to wander in, but anyone who serves the country’s interests, i.e. Gurkhas or Iraqi translators, has it slammed in their face.

    This isn’t merely counter-productive, it is downright malicious.

  3. Surreptitious Evil

    Dan Hannan, who succesfully ran the campaign regarding the Iraqi interpreters is currently out of the country.

    You might be able to guess exactly where he is 🙂

  4. UK politicians love debt, but not debts of honour. You put your life on the line for Britain, then we should look after you as best we can, including allowing you and your immediate family into the UK.

  5. Surreptitious Evil

    Signed.

    including allowing you and your immediate family into the UK.

    If necessary. As it was in the case of Iraq (for many of the interpreters) and seems to be here as well. Although a number of the Iraqi interpreters were reasonably happy to go to Jordan, Egypt and similar – especially if they got some degree of financial support for the move from HMG.

  6. How many translators are we talking about, anyway? If it’s less than, say, ten thousand, it’s not even worth discussing – just let them in.

    Ah, google suggests 650 of them. Well, we’ve got 444 spaces (at current count) vacated by our chaps who didn’t come back. I don’t reckon an extra 200 people will make much difference to population pressures in the UK.

  7. Have signed. Of course. Least we can do for people who’ve put their & possibly their families’ lives at risk to assist us.
    But, to, address johnb’s point. With the reservation it’s not used as an excuse to slip in some second cousin of a Kabul opium dealer who’s greased the appropriate palms. Sorry, but I get deeply suspicious of ‘humanitarian motives’ these days. The military themselves, the guys on the ground, must actually know who these chaps are & who their dependents are. Let’s see the requests come from them & not some desk jockey in the FO or MoD or, heaven forbid, NGO.

  8. Our Afghan allies are doing it wrong.

    You’re supposed to sneak into Britain, have a bunch of kids you have no intention of working to support, and start preaching jihad against the natives. That way, you’ll be showered with free benefits goodies and protected from deportation on the grounds of your human rights.

  9. Bloke in Spain (#12)

    You have hit the nail on the head, as always – one of the problems with allowing the Gurkhas in was the scope of the assistance to be offered. In Nepal the Gurkha could responsible for the entire extended family, which could run into several Dozens – how would they be housed? Would his Siblings be eligible – what about his Aunts, Uncles? I’m not sure anyone had the answers or indeed had given even the slightest thought to formulating an idea around these issues. The same is true within Afghanistan, although I agree with Tim to the extent that the Gurkhas security in Nepal was not in jeopardy, whilst the translators families will certainly be killed off when the Taliban retake the country in the wake of the withdrawal.

    The same question I pose again – how much of the family will be able to come over here? – is it an entire branch of a tribal unit? (could be talking high 3 figures in numbers for one translator) – extended family – What? – I am sorry to act as a quasi – Arnald in his absence (Thatcher funded the Khmer Rouge, honest) but it ill behoves people here to criticize the reams of catastrophically ill thought out legislation put onto the book over the last twenty years or longer, which are the source of many of the issues in the UK, whilst simultaneously issuing a blanket amnesty to potentially thousands of Afghans without some assurances it won’t be abused.

  10. I’m fine with letting a few thousand bludgers in to save the lives of the local assistants. It’s a drop in the ocean, and it’s not like this is an annual intake – pulling out of a country is usually a one-time thing. Even the UK doesn’t fight in Afghanistan more than two or three times a century.

  11. Dr K.A. Rodgers

    New Zealand has just flown in the translators and their families who assited their troops. They got a great welcome.

  12. History Corner: when the UK pulled out of Hong Kong, we were scrupulous in taking good care of the various locals who had been ‘very helpful’ (in ways that their new Chinese masters didn’t appreciate)

    The decision to do the honorable thing was taken – by the much-maligned John Major, BTW – in light of various ghastly precedents in Palestine, Cyprus, Aden … and set the appropriate standard

    flouted subsequently by Blair, of course, and again now it seems

  13. “the British soldier can stands up to anything except the British War Office”
    “The Devil’s Disciple” by George Bernard Shaw

  14. What are these people doing in lieu of governing?

    Researching their EU prospects? Manipulating their taxpayer funded property portfolios? Tossing off to 48 different focus groups?

    I learn from Dr North that the latest deaths arising from the attack on the Mastiff arise from (possibly) the allocation of route clearance of convoys to Afghan police.

    Judging from anecdotal evidence from friends who are medicos, policemen or teachers, it seems that thinking is positively discouraged and blind obedience is the rule.

    This manifests itself in the abhorrence of the elite for markets that they do not control.

    Make the state big enough and no one can be blamed for anything.

    Meanwhile, in the real world, people die for politicians’ vanity.

  15. This is a moral issue: we owe them, and anyone who argues about the duty of the citizen to the state and vice versa should recognise our duty to these interpreters which is comparable to our duty to the Gurkhas.
    Was this *really* a government decision or one by a desk-bound civil servant? If the former (very unlikely) Cameron had better not attend Gaudys (college reunions for those who don’t know) – I had a friend at BNC who was in the Greyhounds and boxed Light-Heavy in his third year.
    It was more hassle to sign than I expected: my LibDem wife signed up quicker.

  16. I speak with personal feeling on the subject of Afghans in my country, having been stabbed in the neck, and nearly paralysed, as well as in my lower back where I sustained a severed artery, by one of the blighters some years ago, and I’m not keen on allowing nutters into my country. Yet I endorse the general sentiments here: this is a disgrace. Pure perfidious Albion.

    How do these people sleep at night?

  17. Isn’t it astonishing how it’s almost impossible to find a private citizen who opposes this, and yet the government won’t do it? So much for representative democracy.

  18. So Much For Subtlety

    As with the Gurkhas the idea of letting in the Afghan translators is a bad one.

    They were hired for a job. They did not have to take the job, but they did. They knew the risks. It is stupid to change the terms and conditions of that employment now. Especially as there is little reason to think they will be murdered once we are gone – in fact they may well have been working for the Taliban to start with. It would be normal for the region to play both ends.

    Nor is taking them just a matter of taking them. It means taking their extended families as well.

    What is more the precedent is a bad one. If we take the translators, how can we refuse to take the soldiers who fought “along side” British squaddies too? And government officials? That sh!t Karzai even. Not to mention their three hundred cousins and aunts. Is there anyone involved in the Afghan mess we can in good conscience refuse? The Americans ended up taking every Vietnamese who could get on a boat.

    Above all this creates a conflict of interest. Now they have every reason to *want* us to lose. How is that a good thing?

    We have let the Goths into the Empire. We have alienated them. They are striking back already. As they did on 7-7. How can it be sensible to take a couple of thousand, or more likely tens of thousands, more?

    The people who voted for UKIP put controls on immigration down as their number one reason. Someone has to act now before we end up like the Greeks of Asia Minor. They will have no problems with this perfectly sensible policy.

  19. SMFS: “As with the Gurkhas the idea of letting in the Afghan translators is a bad one.”

    I’m going to disagree with you here. As far as I can see, theyve been nothing but an asset to our country, unlike most of the rest we are forced to let in…

  20. Julia M, that’s a large part of the point, isn’t it? Given that we seem to have become the plughole for much of the scum of the earth, andgiven that that is a matter of ggovernment policy, would it really kill them to let in a few more worthy candidates as well?

  21. I’m against any immigration controls with a UK owned deportation system, but I’m also against the benefits culture and a non contributory NHS.

    Without the latter, the only people who come here would be contributors who we should welcome with open arms.

    That said, these guys should be allowed in as with the Iraqi translators for reasons obvious to everyone but our resident bigot SMFS.

    The Gurkhas are a different matter for me; professional soldiers who earn enough to live like kings back home, where they’re not under threat like the terps. Historically they joined to do a job and go home. Nice guys, most of the time, but an odd cause to get excited about IMO.

  22. “…but an odd cause to get excited about IMO.”

    Says the person for whom any disagreement with his own outlook is enough to brand someone a ‘bigot’.

  23. I am normally anti any worshiper of the pedophile prophet being allowed into this country. However in this case we must make an exception.
    (I call him the pedophile prophet not only because he was, but because of his example leading to 850,000 girls under 10 in Iran being married.)

  24. I called him a bigot because he’s a bigot, not because I disagree with him.

    I disagree with PaulB and JohnB all the time, but I don’t think they’re bigots.

    I call you a poor, lonely, frothing, paranoid idiot because you are one.

    See how it works?

  25. So Much for Subtlety

    Interested – “That said, these guys should be allowed in as with the Iraqi translators for reasons obvious to everyone but our resident bigot SMFS.”

    If it is obvious explain it to me. They are fighting their own war – for which they charged us a great deal. Hired (and indifferent) help at best. Not life-long faithful servants. They have no more right on our generosity than my taxi driver does to be invited in for a quick cup of tea and a comfy night in the guest bed.

    But I will agree with you about one thing – they have exactly the same right to move here that the Iraqi translators did.

  26. Well, I’ve never been able to come up with a definition of bigot that differs much from *someone who holds an opinion I don’t want to have to acknowledge*, so it’s tempting to add Interested to the B brothers on the bigot list.
    But remembering that when one points, three fingers are pointing straight back at the pointer, let’s not.

  27. So Much for Subtlety

    JuliaM – “I-m going to disagree with you here. As far as I can see, theyve been nothing but an asset to our country, unlike most of the rest we are forced to let in…”

    I am not going to deny they are by and large decent people and if we are going to admit anyone, we could do a lot worse. That is not the point. Childish emotional manipulation is not a good basis for an immigration policy. We employed them. They were happy with the terms of employment. Then some luvvie decides to change our long standing arrangement because she likes the warm feeling striking a pose gives her.

    28 Interested – “I-m also against the benefits culture and a non contributory NHS. Without the latter, the only people who come here would be contributors who we should welcome with open arms.”

    But we have a benefits culture and we do not have a c0ontributory NHS. In other countries the unemployment rate for Afghan immigrants is something like 98 percent. So perhaps if we lived in your ideal world, this policy would be fine. We do not. In our world by what possible reason could these people be considered even half decent immigrants?

    I have just been watching CNN talking about the Boston Bombers and even the mouthpiece of the Far Soft Left is willing to consider that perhaps some violence has a genetic cause. So of course they are all going to become fine up standing tax accountants, right?

    America did nothing to Chechnya. It let in refugees. And they got paid back the only way Islamists know how. We did not invade Somalia or Ethiopia. We still got 7-7. So the real question is, what is your policy on suicide bombings? Because we are going to see a lot more of them.

  28. So Much for Subtlety

    bloke in spain – “But remembering that when one points, three fingers are pointing straight back at the pointer, let-s not.”

    I could care less if Interested calls me a bigot or not. Let us all agree I am if it will advance the conversation. But keep in mind three things:

    1. It does not mean I am wrong,
    2. It is pathetic that people on this blog feel the need to strike a pose by supporting Stuff White People Like. I do not care my family has both working class and middle class roots. I do not need to go around saying stupid things to mark me off from both. Interested obviously does. His loss,
    3. Cameron and Clegg have been trying this tactic on UKIP. And to be fair to them, it has worked quite well for the past six decades. Call your opponent a Fascist and most people will turn away. But it has not worked this time. I think most people have got bored with it and recognise it as the dishonest tactic it is.

    So who gives a f**k? I could chew carpet in my spare time. Interested still does not have a credible argument. All he wants to do is ingratiate himself with our metropolitan elite so no one will think he is common.

  29. SMFS:“Then some luvvie decides to change our long standing arrangement because she likes the warm feeling striking a pose gives her.”

    A little harsh? She’s not unacquainted with the area. She has history. She’s not some airhead taking up a fashionable cause!

  30. bloke in france

    It’s possible that the Afghan government doesn’t want to lose educated people who now are temporarily employed as translators but might be better employed as mining or water engineers if ever the country became half way peaceful.

  31. @SMFS

    > In our world by what possible reason could these people be considered even half decent immigrants?

    Er… in the world where you said this, you dickhead:

    > I am not going to deny they are by and large decent people

    I’m not ‘striking a pose to pretend I’m not common’, not least because I’m not common, by any definition. Not that I care – some of my very best friends are, they really, really are.

    I think Afghan interpreters should be given residency because they have saved British soldiers’ lives, because they didn’t know what they were getting into (because we lied to them, trust me), and because if we don’t give them residency then in many cases they will be disembowelled alive in the street in front of their families.

    I don’t think this is a good thing.

    JuliaM will have some snarky answer that she thinks is clever, but she has never been to Afghanistan, knows no interpreters, has not idea of the work they do, and is a lonely old eejit who spends her life commenting, rather obviously, on Daily Mail stories so…

    (She also finishes every comment with an ellipsis, because she thinks that makes her look clever.)

  32. Also, how can any anonymous person be writing anything so as to ‘ingratiate himself with our metropolitan elite’? How will they know I’m ingratiating myself?

  33. So Much for Subtlety wrote
    “America did nothing to Chechnya.”

    Actually, it did. When the Pakistanis restricted the US and allies’ overland re-supply route to Afghanistan, another solution was needed. That solution was a northern air route through Russian (and allied) airspace (including the use of ground facilities). The price for this is the turning of a blind eye to Russia’s behaviour in Chechnya, which is decidedly less “hearts and minds” than our Western approach.

    This is not to suggest that the two terrorists in Boston were directly motivated by this fact (since I don’t know) but I’m pretty sure their backers in the troubled home region would have been well aware.

  34. So Much for Subtlety

    JuliaM – “A little harsh? She-s not unacquainted with the area. She has history. She-s not some airhead taking up a fashionable cause!”

    So you are claiming, as mitigation, that she is more loyal to the people of North India than to her homeland? She is doing a very good impersonation of an airhead taking up some fashionable cause. I see no sign she has had any deep thoughts on the impact this will have on British life, on the Army, on recruitment, on future soldiers – not to mention the costs of keeping the Gurkhas if they are going to get welfare for life.

    39 Interested – “Er… in the world where you said this, you dickhead:”

    A comment about Gurkhas is not applicable to Afghans.

    “Not that I care – some of my very best friends are, they really, really are.”

    And yet you saw a need to tell us.

    “I think Afghan interpreters should be given residency because they have saved British soldiers lives, because they didn-t know what they were getting into (because we lied to them, trust me), and because if we don-t give them residency then in many cases they will be disembowelled alive in the street in front of their families.”

    Sorry but why do you think anything remotely bad will happen to them? When the Soviet Union withdrew, did the Taliban slaughter everyone who supported the Soviets? No, they were more concerned about slaughtering more ancient enemies among the Shia.

    It is not that they have saved British lives. It is that British lives have been sacrificed to save their preferred form of government and freedom. That is enough.

    But still, thousands of Afghan soldiers have also fought with the British Army and perhaps have saved some lives. Save all of them too? Civil Servants? Karzai himself? Who would you not give citizenship to just because they would not fight to defend their government?

  35. So Much for Subtlety

    PJF – “Actually, it did. When the Pakistanis restricted the US and allies overland re-supply route to Afghanistan, another solution was needed. That solution was a northern air route through Russian (and allied) airspace (including the use of ground facilities). The price for this is the turning of a blind eye to Russia’s behaviour in Chechnya”

    So the West did nothing. It goes to the heart of the irrational hatred tthe Muslim world has for us that we are blown up for trying to help, and we are blown up for not doing enough to help. Not to mention the illogical hatred the Left has for the West that they think this is a valid answer. America did nothing. Perhaps they should have. But they did not. For that they have died.

    And people here are seriously proposing to let in thousands more people who share this backward hate-filled mind set? Admittedly now there are more than a million of them here it probably will not make much of a difference.

  36. @So Much for Subtlety
    Turning a blind eye to atrocity where you would normally condemn it is not the same as doing nothing, at least not diplomatically (i.e. foreign policy).

    Terrorists blowing people and things up to bring attention to, and otherwise advance, their cause has a long and perfectly rational history. It works (see Northern Ireland, plus Sharia law partially already imposed on the West).

  37. The price for this is the turning of a blind eye to Russia’s behaviour in Chechnya, which is decidedly less “hearts and minds” than our Western approach.

    Your timing’s off here. Russia’s worst behaviour in Chechnya occurred during the 2nd Chechen War in 1999, 2 years before 9/11. Pakistan closed its supply routes in Afghanistan in 2011. By the time America needed Russian help, there wasn’t much (relatively speaking) to turn a blind eye to in Chechnya.

  38. So Much For Subtlety

    PJF – “Turning a blind eye to atrocity where you would normally condemn it is not the same as doing nothing, at least not diplomatically (i.e. foreign policy).”

    I am not sure that is true. No one turned a blind eye. The US was just busy with others things – and the timing is not right as Tim N points out. The US Republicans did actually flirt with supporting the Chechens. Moreover a blind eye is precisely what the Muslim world is allegedly demanding we do. All the time.

    “Terrorists blowing people and things up to bring attention to, and otherwise advance, their cause has a long and perfectly rational history. It works (see Northern Ireland, plus Sharia law partially already imposed on the West).”

    Indeed. There is the problem. They think that we will become their b!tches if they blow up a few more things. And the Left gives them every reason to think so. It is a shame to see the Right helping them down that path too.

  39. Surreptitious Evil

    But still, thousands of Afghan soldiers have also fought with the British Army and perhaps have saved some lives. Save all of them too?

    But as employees of the Afghan government not the British government. The difference is not the impact they’ve had, it is the duty of care we owe.

    Civil Servants? Karzai himself?

    See above. We don’t owe a duty of care to Karzai. We don’t owe a duty of care to the entire tribe any interpreter belongs to. We owe a duty of care to the interpreter and their direct dependents. The sensible question is – “to what level does that duty of care extend?”

    As they are, because of the work they have done for us and their lives are at risk as a direct consequence, then it extends to removing them from direct danger. One of the easiest ways to do that is giving them temporary or permanent residence rights in the UK.

  40. Here in NZ we’ve flown our translators and their families over and given them somewhere to live and the support to integrate into the country.

    And I’m bloody proud of my country for doing so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *